I am very appreciative of the gracious hospitality extended to us by the Government of Luxembourg and I am quite pleased to address this high forum on the first anniversary of its establishment. We have come a long way since that historic moment, when our shared commitment to security cooperation in Europe led to the establishment of this new cooperative mechanism, forming an important framework for enhanced efforts in both an expanded political dimension of partnership and practical cooperation under Partnership for Peace. The important principles that the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council has inherited from its predecessors have increased the scope for consultation and cooperation on regional matters and activities, and have given usհthe partnersհopportunities for greater involvement in decision-making on activities in which we participate. Today, the development and enhancement of dialogue and partnership with Cooperation Partners form an integral part of NATO's Strategic Concept.

To this end, we welcome the substantive work carried out within the framework of EAPC as indicated in the Comprehensive Progress Report. In this context, it is worth noting the development of the concept of enhanced practical cooperation in the field of international disaster relief. Armenia, based on its won experience, perceives the importance of cooperative international efforts in the case of natural disaster. In the eve of the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the Armenia earthquake, we welcome this initiative and express our gratitude to Russia for originating the idea of and all NATO member and partner states for their efforts in developing the concept. The development of the Combined Joint Task Forces and the implementation of the Partnership Staff Element are another very exciting and vivid examples of enhanced PfP.

All this reflects the fundamentally changed nature of the European security framework. There is clearly greater genuine common interest in working together to find solutions to shared problems.

The security problems of the Caucasus region have their own dynamic and they differ from the issues that have traditionally dominated the security debate in Europe. Nevertheless, the positive evolution of security issues in Central and Eastern Europe are having a very beneficial effect on attitudes in the Caucasus, where individually and as a group, countries are developing relations with European institutions in general and NATO in particular.

Although Armenia may be geographically distant from Brussels, but its concerns and interests are not. This is a country with strong connections with allies on both sides of the Atlantic, and a country which shares a border with the Alliance. As an EAPC founding member, Armenia is committed to take on its share of responsibility by continuing to be actively engaged at three parallel levels: a direct political relationship with the Alliance, expanded participation in the enhanced PfP, and efforts aimed at establishing and advancing a viable regional security cooperation.

Armenia has a common frontier with a NATO member state. A common sense would suggest that sharing a border with the Alliance would enhance our sense of security. This is not the case at the Armenian-Turkish border, however. Turkey not only rejects the establishment of diplomatic relations with Armenia, but furthermore, Turkey continues to operate a seven-year-long blockade of our country, thus depriving Armenia of its potential for political and economic expansion, and deepening its relationship with the Alliance and its individual member states. Instead of being an unbiased OSCE Minsk Group member, Turkey, in the Nagorno Karabagh conflict, openly backs Azerbaijan's extreme positions and expectations. Turkey's policy in the Caucasus, based on an unconditional, unwise and short-sighted ethnic alliance against Armenia, not only diminishes our sense of security, but also erects major obstacles to the development of a direct political relationship and achievement of our partnership objectives within the Alliance.

Another security concern for Armenia is the stalled peace process of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict. To put the peace process back on track a thorough assessment of the past record should be made, in order to arrive at appropriate conclusions. First, Nagorno Karabagh should be given equal negotiation opportunities in accordance with the will of its people on the basis of its right to self-determination, and at the same time, it should continue to preserve its secure existence within safe borders, with free and unimpeded geographic access to the outside world. Preconditions which presume self-rule to Nagorno Karabagh within Azerbaijan are not acceptable, since that would leave Nagorno Karabagh with limited options in negotiating an acceptable status. What we need now is an innovative package proposal not based on any preconditions, that allows the parties to sit together and agree to terms for a future they can live with.

When we speak of early warning and prevention mechanisms, we should understand political intervention in the right time, so as to prevent the possibility of growth of tensions into a full scale armed conflict. In practice this means pressuring a government to start negotiations with relevant entities and introduce measures to defuse the crisis, taking into account the legitimate interests of each party to the conflict. The Kososvo case is another vivid example proving the actuality of the vision.

It is also true that only democratic governments can ensure population's free and safe development. Thus we believe that EAPC should continue to keep in perspective the strengthening of democratization process and democratic control over armed forces հ issues actual not only for the Partner countries.

Partnership for Peace has become the focal point of our efforts to build new patterns of practical cooperation with NATO in the security realm. We welcome and endorse decisions taken in Sintra and Madrid to enhance the PfP by strengthening the political consultation element, increasing the role partners play in PfP decision-making and planning, and by making PfP more operational.

Since becoming a Partner for Peace in October 1994, Armenia has participated in a range of PfP activities. Our IPP has grown significantly during the past two years. The draft of our IPP for the years 1998-2000 includes 12 areas and 130 activities compared to 4 areas and I 1 activities three years ago, and yet we are convinced that there is still room for much more. To this end, Armenia has serious intentions to further expand the scope of its political consultations and practical cooperation within the EAPC/PfP, to extend it to such areas as interoperability, standardization, peacekeeping and combined exercises. Our Ministry is working with the Ministry of Defense of Armenia to form a battalion and make it available for peace support activities. What we want to achieve first, however, is interoperability between our armed forces. We need communications systems that can communicate; we need to be able to send reinforcement in times of crisis; and we need our soldiers to speak the same language.

What I have tried to convey today is a sense of the importance of Armenia specifically, and the Caucasus region, generally, to NATO and our desire to see our cooperation develop as it has been the case elsewhere in Europe. Under these new circumstances, when Europe is no longer divided, we have a unique chance to shape Europe into a region of cooperation and stability, in which every country has its say and none considers itself threatened. I believe that the political climate is right to achieve this ambitious goal. The principal characteristic of the new Europe may be its diversity, but I am convinced, the strength of its potential lies in its growing sense of unity.